JamesJones44
Reputable
Consumer side GE, yes. Industrial side GE is still a successful business (well 3 now I guess)Just like GE
Consumer side GE, yes. Industrial side GE is still a successful business (well 3 now I guess)Just like GE
They are in a very similar boat. IDK if they survive either, will be a long road if they somehow make it out.Stellantis' CEO also just stepped down, so quite a dramatic recent turn of events going into the end of 2024!
The Fed chip acts doesn't prevent spinning out as a separate private entity, it just says Intel must have 50.1% ownership/voting rights if it is spun out as a separate entity, or 35% shareholder if the spinned out foundry goes IPO. (source) It's a forgone conclusion that IFS will be spinned out as a separate entity to offload the costs from balance sheet, just now it's 49.1% offload as opposed to 100% offload.I think the latest Fed chip act money blocks them from doing so. But with republicans taking over they may let them if there is some grift to be had.
History will not be as kind to Pat the Engineer as you are. He did more damage to a damaged company.They didn't give him enough time. I agree with @Marlin1975 , I think he is being made the fall guy. The damage was done by the bean counter CEO.
It's temporarily and a common practice. The job of CEO is to much for a single person to do and still do their other important job. So they split the job in half and have two other senior executives do it while also doing their other major job until the board hires a new CEO.Co-CEO's? LoL. There is a reason there aren't co-Captains on a ship.
I believe Pat Gelsinger suffered from Bob Swan's screw ups, and he's a fall guy for having to clean up Bob Swan's messes and not making Intel look good.Yeah, this is pretty alarming. Intel has been struggling with execution in a variety of ways since 2014. The architectures released in the past three years of Gelsinger being at the helm were mostly done and designed before he even got started. I'm not at all confident in Intel's ability to correct things with some other CEO instead of Pat, at least in the near term. It could be a decade or more to recover, if ever.
Bob Swan could've done that, but he chose not to.Pat has the right idea with Intel Foundry and chasing US gov't investments. The former should have happened a decade ago at least.
The old story of the "Tortoise & the Hare".That's how TSMC got ahead... that and consistent execution. But it's ironic that just as Intel floundered (refinements of 14nm for years), TSMC managed to do better.
Like those 9000 series prices?Not a good sign to switch leaders in the midst of a crisis. Looks like AMD has won the CPU market, and in my opinion they deserve it.
Like those 9000 series prices?
Without any competition they will be more expensive next round. AMD has only been relevant for the last 6 years. before that it was all Intel minus a few skus for AMD, remember what AMD use to sell chips for?
Poor Pat. Can we assume that 18A is broken too? I read about his career on Wikipedia - it seemed highly unlikely that he was a fit for the job. If they were looking to hire a technical person - why not at least somebody with PHD?
I said minus a few skus....Guess you never heard of this thing called the Athlon. That and its succesors beat the crap out of Intel many years ago.
I said minus a few skus....
point is without Intel, you will no longer afford AMD cpus.